Thursday, March 17, 2011

In honour of St. Patrick's Day today, I am proudly wearing Green. This has drawn some heat from some of my schoolmates. You see, I am a conservative, confessional Lutheran, and I attend a school populated solely by conservative, confessional Lutherans. And a fair number of them insist upon w﻿earing orange today because, "We are Protestants!" But in my mind, that is no reason to be fostering division. Although doctrinally speaking I am what most would call a "protestant," from a political aspect I am much more Catholic. I would also say that since most Irish Protestants are not Lutherans, it is neither necessary nor appropriate for we Lutherans to wear "Protestant" colours on this day.

First of all, Christ Himself, as well as the Holy Apostle Paul, exhorts us to keep the Church united. We are divided enough on account of doctrinal issues already, and I am sure God does not look happily upon the divided state of His Holy Church in our time. Why then should we further disregard His command by fostering more division than is already necessary? Wearing orange on St. Patrick's day serves no positive purpose. At best it is a reminder of the division in the church. At worst, it is outright provacative to our Catholic brethren in the Faith.

Secondly, green is the colour of Ireland, not of the Catholic Church. The fact that Irish Protestants feel the need for a new colour, in my opinion, is ridiculous. If anything, it is a denial of their Irish culture, not of their former Catholicism. Orange is not the colour of Ireland. This defiance is just another jab. Reformers such as Hus and Luther were not interested in hostilities with the Catholic Church, but in the reformation of teachings which they considered counter to Scripture. This is why I reject the label of Protestant, myself, though just about everybody applies it to me. The name Protestant comes from the verb "to protest." Protests, even if not always violent, are always defiant. They are always divisive in nature. Since I seek Christian unity, not division, I reject this label. Where I have my disagreements with His Holiness on matters of doctrine I will certainly stand my ground based upon the Scriptures, but that is no cause for me to be hateful towards either the Pope himself nor towards my Catholic brothers and sisters. I have the utmost respect for Catholics and for Roman Catholicism. Indeed, in my heart I greatly yearn for reconciliation with the Catholic Church, and only aforementioned doctrinal differences preclude this.

Finally, green is a colour associated with St. Patrick himself. To wear orange in defiance on this day is to defy St. Patrick himself and his mission. And what was his mission? Why, the very mission which Christ gave to all Christians: to go forth unto the nations and baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. St. Patrick brought the gospel to thousands of souls yearning for their Saviour. To defy this is to defy the Great Commission itself! This is most certainly not the act of a Christian, but of a pagan! Whether they realize it or not, Protestants who wear orange on St. Patrick's Day are in effect defying the very command of Christ to preach the gospel!

Therefore, for the sake of Christian unity, out of respect for Ireland, and in honour of St. Patrick and the Great Commission, I proudly wear green on this Feast Day of St. Patrick. God be praised for the work He did through this great saint. And may God's blessings follow all who read this message. Pax tecum!

Thursday, March 10, 2011

“For every monarchy overthrown the sky becomes less brilliant, because it loses a star. A republic is ugliness set free.”
Anatole France, first winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature, 1921.

There are many things about democracy and so-called “representative government” that bother me. One of the many is their sheer hatred for true beauty and their worship of ugliness. Now, anyone who believes in the democratic principle will immediately ask me, “What the heck are you talking about?” And I suppose I owe that an answer. Again, there are many examples I could name, but here I am specifically thinking about flags.

Living in the States, I am constantly bombarded with American patriotism, and one of those things is a love for the “Stars and Stripes.” You would not believe how often I have heard expressions such as, “Isn’t that the most beautiful flag you’ve ever seen?” And of course there’s the bumper sticker that reads, “These colors don’t run.” And I am forced to ask, just what is so beautiful about it? Thirteen stripes alternating in red and white, a blue field taking up less than a quarter of it, with fifty little white stars in it. Big whoop. My six year-old cousin could draw a better picture than that! When I look at that thing, I honestly wonder how my neighbours can look at that and have pride swell up in their hearts. Of course they would argue, “Well, it’s the things it stands for! Freedom! It stands for freedom!” Uh huh. And what is freedom, exactly? Well, any proponent of democracy will tell you freedom is having a say in your government. Guess what? That was the claim that Cromwell and his thugs made when they waged war on King Charles I, and what did England get when Cromwell won? The greatest tyranny in her history, worse than any king she had ever known. Coincidence? I think not. That was the battle cry of the rebels in the thirteen colonies that would later come to call themselves “The United States of America.” It seems to Americans the idea of representation is the only thing that matters. Americans today are taxed far more heavily and far more forcibly than their colonial ancestors. “But at least we have representation!” You know what? You keep your representation, and let me keep my money. Deal? The French Revolution had a similar battle cry about public representation as well, and from said Revolution we got the Reign of Terror and the Vendee Massacre, considered by many historians to be the first instance of modern genocide. Is it any wonder the lament went up to heaven, “O Liberty, what horrors are committed in thy name!”

King Charles I of England, that monarch supposedly so horrible and even treasonous (if it is even possible for a king to be a traitor), had a very different definition of freedom. He insisted that the liberty of the subject lies not in participation in government (a thing which never has been, nor ever ought to be a right of the subject in his hallowed opinion), but rather in this: that each man’s life and property be his own. Now, I don’t know about you, but I like that definition of freedom better. Let me have my life and my goods, and I’ll be happy. But the Federal Government gets a nice chunk of my income before I ever even see it, and don’t get me started on Imminent Domain. In short, freedom is rather lacking in this country, so the claim that the beauty of the American flag is that is stands for freedom is effectively nill. Without that claim for its beauty, what else remains? It’s a kindergarten-level drawing is what it is.

Compare that with the standards of the royal families of Europe. The Stuarts, the Habsburgs, the Bourbons, these were families with beautiful banners. Not some silly tri-colour with arbitrary colours declaring, “we’re a bunch of tasteless robots!” But a beautiful work of art, with each intricate detail holding meaning, declaring that this is a family with a proud history, a legacy which they shall never surrender.

This is, of course, only one of many things I have to say. But it is as good a place as any to start. It is something that has bothered me for a long time. These republics overthrow monarchies and claim to defend the liberty of the subject and usher in modernity. Well, if “liberty” and “modernity” are this oppressive and ugly, I’ll take my “tyrannical” and “old fashioned” monarchs back, please. I’m sick of republics, I’m sick of their pseudo-liberty, and I’m sick of their boring, tasteless, tri-colour banners. The world needs a change. A change back to the old ways. We need to remember our traditions, our monarchs, and restore them!

I’m not a conservative because I can’t stand the present status quo. I’m not a progressive or a liberal because I don’t think the next “new” thing will fix the problem. I’m a reactionary, because I know it is only by looking back to our roots that we can take the proper steps forward.

Wednesday, March 09, 2011

It is Ash Wednesday today. Thus begins the season of Lent, a time when the Church bids farewell to her Alleluias as she remembers the suffering Christ endured for her and as she honours the preparations He made for that suffering. On the festival of Easter (or, if you prefer, Pascha) when we celebrate Christ's triumphant resurrection from the dead and the accomplishment of our salvation, we shall again sing Alleluia. But for now, we remember the sorrows of our Lord, and that we are but ashes and dust. A blessed Ash Wednesday to all, and may we all look forward to the joys of that Paschal Sunday, forty days hence.

Friday, March 04, 2011

So, I've finally done what I figured I would never do. I've created a blog. It's main purpose was to allow me to comment on other blogs, but Lord only knows what may come of it in the future. I may not post much, I may become a prolific writer. What I do know is... I'm here. And I'm here to stay. I'm a traditionalist who believes the old ways, not the new, are what we need to restore some good to this word. I'm a (rather out of shape) cross country runner who loves the thrill of each race, and refuses to back down. I am... The Reactionary Runner!